Thursday 30th April 2026
Blog Page 801

Oxford councillor resigns Labour whip after ‘anti-semitic’ comments

0

An Oxford councillor has resigned the Labour Party whip, less than a week after his ‘anti-semitic’ and ‘homophobic’ Facebook posts were revealed by Cherwell.

Ben Lloyd-Shogbesan was re-elected as Labour councillor for Lye Valley earlier this month, having held the seat for the party since 2010.

However, he has since come under widespread fire after Cherwell revealed he had compared Israel to Nazi Germany, praised former Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, and alluded to same sex marriages as a “perversion” on his Facebook page.

Now, at the first city council meeting since the election, chief executive Gordon Mitchell has announced that Mr Lloyd-Shogbesan has resigned the Labour whip ahead of a standards committee hearing set to determine whether he has broken council rules.

This means he will remain a local councillor but will no longer be officially affiliated with  Oxford Labour.

Leaders of all other major parties in Oxford have called on Lloyd-Shogbesan to resign or be sacked. Liberal Democrat group leader, Andrew Gant, said: “Council leader Susan Brown has described his comments as “disappointing”. This is nowhere near good enough.

“It is sad to see the poison that is infecting the Labour Party nationally appearing here in Oxford, along with the same feeble response from the leadership.”

In an email sent on Monday night to his fellow city councillors, Lloyd-Shogbesan said: “I am sure that you are all aware of recent publications in Cherwell news about my reposting of images and comments from other organisations and individuals on my Facebook account.

“I regret the repostings and would like to offer my profound apologies to colleagues on Oxford City Council for any hurt or discomfort they may have endured.

“I have deleted my Facebook account and the offensive posts. I am also making overtures to the Synagogue and the Jewish community and other groups and communities affected in order to engage in positive and meaningful discussions about concerns and how best to redress the situation going forward

“Lastly, I have referred myself to the Oxford City Council Standards Committee for them to investigate and I will cooperate fully with subsequent developments.

“I am not and have never been antisemitic or racist or homophobic in all my life. I have worked hard to challenge injustice and discrimination and promote equality and diversity at all times and would continue to do so.”

The Labour Party confirmed on Monday that a complaint has been made and it is investigating. Labour MP for Oxford East, Anneliese Dodds, is yet to comment on Lloyd-Shogbessan’s comments.

The King of The Fall rises from Starboy’s ashes

0

Those who loved The Weeknd’s first releases were probably attracted to his mysterious appeal. In a world obsessed and distorted by the bright lights of fame, it was refreshing to see a musician take himself out of the spotlight and instead let an undoubtedly incredible talent do all the talking.

The chilling quality of songs such as Wicked Games and Loft Music marked an eye-opening vulnerability, and this won humble Abel Tesfaye his early fanbase. Despite House of Balloons releasing to critical acclaim and Trilogy charting at number four on the Billboard 200, widespread recognition didn’t come until his breakout hit Earned It for the Fifty Shades soundtrack. Although infectiously catchy, it lacked the affecting bitterness of The Weeknd’s earlier tracks, and subsequent albums became increasingly pop-oriented.

However, original fans can rejoice at the sound of The Weeknd’s latest project. The very name of My Dear Melancholy, shows a rediscovered maturity and a return to the murky darkness from which he first emerged, after the recent glitz of the commercial Starboy. Though the first track listed, Call Out My Name, is reminiscent of the hit Earned It that it samples, the ‘old Abel’ mood is evident in his clear channelling of pain through the lyrics.

Try Me continues in a similar vein, imitating most of the early Trilogy tracks in establishing a haunting intro and outro in the use of echoes. While the visuals for the first two tracks invoke much of the red and yellow colour symbolism of Starboy, the hazy viewpoint is disturbing and there is an afterparty-esque ambience in both. The videos allow an insight into his solitude behind the façade and the iPhone-camera feel of it is refreshingly intimate. 

Wasted Times acts as a self-declared breakup anthem, if the Twitter response was anything to go by, especially if the allusions that litter this song are considered in light of his relationships with Bella Hadid and, more recently, Selena Gomez. Evocative of a Craig David-style vibe, with any other (remotely happy) lyricset, this would make a surefire bop, but The Weeknd’s unsettling vocals quickly depress any optimism. 

Continuing through the tracklist, I Was Never There is an instant declaration of vulnerability and the presence of Yeezus collaborator Gesaffelstein is obvious: piercing sirens detract from otherwise-repetitive lyrics and the track is foggy yet atmospheric from the outside. A Weeknd-trademark inversion halfway through introduces a second movement which delicately floats, as in House of Balloons/Glass Table Girls.

While Hurt You bears striking resemblance to hits of Abel’s more recent fame, with a sample of Starboy being just-distinguishable, the sexually-charged lyrics are more closely aligned with The Weeknd’s early remix repertoire, including Drunk In Love and Or Nah.

The outgoing track, Privilege, sounds the most like his early tracks composed in a fogged and drug-fuelled stupor under the XO’TWOD tagline. It offers a perspective similar to that of the Trilogy Eps: a hazy Abel refuses emotional dependence on lovers and instead turns to substances to numb any pain. A promise that Abel will “be back to [his] old ways” epitomises the message of My Dear Melancholy,. The lack of promotion for this project is in-line with his original faceless obscurity and suggests some discomfort with the extent to which his life became public in a matter of months. 

As someone who appreciated the uniqueness of The Weeknd’s early distinctiveness, this release is exciting and, despite its liminality in that awkward state between EP and album, it’s a welcome move away from the exhausted sound of Starboy. The lyrics may still be repetitive, but the return of his sweet falsetto tones juxtaposed with their gritty material subverts his recent conformity to the constraints of mainstream popular music and even R&B standards.

Oxford MP calls on government to recognise Palestine

0

Oxford MP Layla Moran has urged the government to formally recognise the state of Palestine, following widespread violence in Gaza.

Moran, who is the first British MP to be of Palestinian descent, said that hope “had died” this week – but that Britain could resurrect it through recognising the Palestinian state.

Her call for action came as funerals were held for the 58 Palestinians reportedly killed on Monday when Israeli troops opened fire during protests, in what was the deadliest day of violence there since the war in 2014.

Moran began her speech on a personal note, saying that if it weren’t for Nakba – the term Palestinians use to commemoration the displacement that preceded and followed the Israeli Declaration of Independence in 1948 – she might not be speaking there today, and that this compelled her bring the matter to Parliament’s attention.

She continued: “In between Hamas and a very extreme Israeli prime minister, we have the blood of children.

“The two sides are not meeting as equals among whatever peace process table. Now is the moment to give recognition to the Palestinians so that we have hope, because that is also what has died this week.”

Ms Moran held her head in her hand and was comforted by Green party leader  Caroline Lucas as a foreign office minister, Alistair Burt, replied: “Recognition to the Palestinian state remains open at a time when it is best designed to serve the cause of peace and that will remain the UK’s position.”

Butt Kapinski Review – ‘a masterclass in light-hearted entertainment and audience participation’

How do you get an audience to do what you want? How do you get them to suspend their disbelief, to believe in fairies and flashbacks, in otherworlds and acted emotions? How do you involve them in your performance games without disrupting the fragile construction of the play-world? These are questions that have troubled the theatrical discipline for centuries, but Butt Kapinski’s award-winning combination of plying your audience with alcohol, then unleashing a deranged detective with a lamp sticking out of his back to insult them, yields marvellous results. This eccentric one-woman (and an entire audience) show is a masterclass in both light-hearted entertainment and audience participation.

Even before entering the Old Fire Station theatre, I am stopped to be told a short list of instructions: pick any seat; do not move from it; “no seat is safe”. I take my seat in a room with very few chairs bunched up in a semi-circle formation in the middle of the theatre. Enter Butt Kapinski, immediately establishing dominance over the audience, bursting out from behind the curtain, darting in and out of the aisles, and lap- dancing with one viewer. The audience both knew what they were getting into, and could not possibly comprehend what was coming next.

Kapinski himself, played by Deanna Fleysher, is the heart of the show. The level of charisma Fleysher demonstrates in singlehandedly controlling her audience across an hour-long show is astounding. The character’s accent and lisp, replacing all r’s and l’s with w’s and distorting the vowels, never gets old. I would have deemed this stylistic decision to be a little on-the- nose, if it were not also cleverly incorporated into some killer lines: before the “film nwoiw” (noir) can began, Kapinski outlines some tropes and asks “are we all queer?” (clear) to which we all assented, naturally; one of the characters Kapinski brings into the narrative has some advice that “will change your wife” (life). The creaking of the rusty lamp above Kapinski’s head as he shoves it into an audience member’s face at various speeds never failed to crack me up. Butt Kapinski is an ingeniously odd creation.

But Kapinski himself is only half the act: “no seat is safe”. Butt Kapinski taps into that repressed desire within the audience when watching a highly formalised display such as a play: the desire to perform with the actors, to test the limits of that world. That lamp above Kapinski’s head is not just great to laugh at, but the perfect way to aid dialogue by shining it over an audience member, giving them a visible cue without having to say anything or break out of character. Fleysher’s audience conditioning and conveyance is so strong that everyone in the audience gets really invested in their roles disturbingly quickly, to the point that they were contributing to the show without cueing. One woman was given a microphone and told to provide appropriate music throughout the show: by the end of the show, she was inserting ironically seductive songs into the performance at opportune moments. Another woman was told to act as a police officer, but remained largely unused throughout the show. After the reveal of the murderer, however, she sprang up, arrested the perpetrator and fiercely told the audience member to “get down!”.

At the end of the show, Kapinski reveals that (shock horror), he was actually a woman the entire time, and Butt Kapinski but an act put on by a lonely American woman. Fleysher then sits down and asks an audience member to duct tape her to the chair, after which she then wishes for a hero like Butt Kapinski to rescue her. We did what any good audience would do: nothing. We sat and waited to see how long Fleysher would keep it up, before she said that she could go on like this all night. The joy of Butt Kapinski comes from being able to participate in the show, whilst deviating from what is expected of one, being in competition with the actress, whilst simultaneously aiding her craft.

I did not escape participation, either. If anything, Kapinski singled me out very early on, catching sight of me scribbling down notes, and forced me into more uncomfortable situations than the rest of the audience. On multiple occasions, he came over, grabbed my pen from out of my hand, and proceeded to scribble over my notes. One time, I was forced to improvise a poem about my abuse at the hands of my husband. Another time, I had to play a lesbian prostitute, make out with my friend, and then pose erotically with the other men whilst the women imitated male masturbation around me. Fleysher knows that her humour is amoral, and you know it is when contributing to it, yet she somehow makes it okay in this liminal space.

Breaking News: Charles is assaulted by Butt Kapinski. I do hope that isn’t what I think it is.

That said, this is the third murder mystery-related improvised comedy show I have seen in a row, and the third to fall slightly short of exploring everything that narrative structure has to offer. I was lucky(?) to have been picked to act on so many occasions, and I am glad that so many of the cues involved the whole audience, but there could have been more skits based on the murder mystery theme – Fleysher is so charismatic, I have no doubt she could have persisted for half an hour more. When I was given the instruction not to swap chairs with anyone, I was anticipating having to move more. Only a brave few had the opportunity to stray from the safe confines of their chair, meaning the distance between actor and audience was still very much perceptible.

Even with those small blemishes, Butt Kapinski remains an incredibly bold show and the closest a production has come to achieving a perfect mastery of audience participation, at least that I have seen. Although it at times made me very aware of the middle-aged audience I was in, with its saucily erotic jokes, Fleysher’s creation is a delight to watch and act alongside. Her command of the audience is indomitable, even when we tried our best to deviate from what was expected of us. Unfortunately, Butt Kapinski was only showing in Oxford for a single night, but the show is touring around London and Bristol, among others, and I would implore you to grab tickets if you get the chance. There’s nothing else quite like it.

Geographers must celebrate the diversity of their field

0

At what point is a figure too political to be celebrated? I am a second-year geography student, and I’m undecided as to whether I support the display of the now-infamous portrait of Theresa May on the School of Geography and Environment’s walls – and this question sums up my internal debate.

Geography as a discipline is unusually self-reflective in that it constantly questions its own past and its current production of knowledge.

This is something that our degree encourages from students – critical analysis is a necessary element in all geographical thought and underpins our academic work.

The protest from ‘NotAllGeographers’ and academics within the department is laudable, but in ignoring the other female alumnae on that wall, these critics have only done half of their job.

The selection of each individual on that wall was in itself a political act, yet remains unquestioned.

For example, the progressive Doreen Massey, who sat below May before the portrait’s removal, was extremely politically active in her lifetime, including her contentious influence over Hugo Chavez’s political strategies in his Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela.

Yet politics isn’t necessarily just what’s played out at the international level – the deliberate repre- sentation of any of these women is putting across a point.

As a crude example, choosing an Olympian over a musician might suggest that sporting success is more impressive than music for Oxford’s alumnae.

Each of these women are influential in different ways, so just because Theresa May is highly visible in the public realm doesn’t mean that Susan Smith’s contribution to economic geography won’t have had impacts on the production of knowledge which will impact the worldviews of her students and the field as a whole.

Either think about the selection of each woman, or accept that this is a non-political display charting the success of female alumnae of the department regardless of their views.

The academics, in their letter, point out that Theresa May’s policies as Home Secretary and then Prime Minister don’t align with the typically left-leaning tendencies of contemporary Geography.

It is worth remembering that Theresa May’s geographical education in the mid-1970s would have been drastically different to that of today’s students, which now incorporates a much more radical approach where activism and social justice are increasingly a primary goal for geographical scholars.

The point to be made here is that Geography is a subject in a state of flux, with constantly moving views and positions.

Oxford students may champion postcolonial perspectives in our studies of development and moder- nity, but we do this while sitting in the Halford Mackinder Lecture Theatre, named after a colonialist who disrespected and phsyically abused his black porters.

On our way to the lecture theatre, we peacefully make our way past Rhodes House, representing the infamous British imperialist.

Where do we draw the line between who is appropriate to represent the discipline, or even who is sufficiently inoffensive to be publicly celebrated?

It’s true that portraying an incumbent head of government is an unusual practice in any higher education institution.

It’s also true that is could be construed as the School of Geography and the Environment taking an active political stance in favour of one party, and academics’ concern at this is logical.

However, the School was trying to highlight through this display that its female graduates can go on to do exciting and interesting things with their degree.

The variety of successful women on show from a range of political backgrounds should serve to inspire the next generation of Oxford Geography students, rather than divide them.

A Streetcar Named Desire Review – “a play that unpicks toxic masculinity”

0

Tennessee Williams’ A Streetcar Named Desire is a play so broad in its themes that the number of possible dramatic focus points seems infinite. The most obvious include the destructive, primitive, and inescapable nature of desire, and the decadence and decay of an entire social class as embodied by Blanche DuBois. This interpretation, produced by English Touring Theatre, Nuffield Southampton Theatres, and Theatr Clywd focuses on the first. Director Chelsea Walker takes the play from its 1940s context, placing it in 2018. A KFC bucket, Nike trainers, Bardot crop tops drag the script to the present day. The result, in the words of Walker, is a play that ‘unpicks toxic masculinity’, a thematic thread in that is certainly more obvious to an audience in 2018 than 1947.

The early scenes between Blanche (Kelly Gough) and Stella (Amber James) set up a sense of fragile sisterhood, the dynamic being one where Blanche does the talking. The actors conveyed the silent awareness between the sisters – that such an antiquated relationship, of an antiquated time, will not be sustained in Stella’s new life – in an understated and poignant manner. Stella’s life with Stanley was translated not only through her growing frustration with her sister’s airs, but through the lurid colours that, in this production, quite literally form the backdrop of her life, as Stanley, Mitch and Pablo burst onto the stage, wearing bold primary colours. It was an aesthetic reminiscent of Almodóvar, which is unsurprising, since Williams’ play formed a structuring device in the 1999 film Todo sobre mi madre. Walker’s production, like Almodóvar’s film, took specific interest in the theme of sisterhood and its doomed transition into a world ruled by the Stanley Kowalski types.

On a further aesthetic note, Georgia Lowe’s set design was crucial shedding light on the forces driving Stanley and Mitch’s behaviour. It was an aspect of the production which truly stood out. The set was sparse: two rooms, a bed, a table and chairs were all that was necessary to underline the two motivations, food and sex, that drive Williams’ characters. A mezzanine was suggestive of the claustrophobic atmosphere of Elysian Fields which exposed the visceral relationship between Eunice and Steve. In the final moments, it was an opportunity to recreate the iconic cover of the New Directions first edition of the text. Stanley was sitting atop the stage as the omnipotent force in the lives of the DuBois sisters, a shameless puppeteer.

It is understandable why the ‘modern’ set details were included – the audience was forced to contemplate how institutions may still conspire against the vulnerable, and still enable the dominance of Stanley (Patrick Knowles), and result in Stella’s to reject Blanche’s claims. However, this resulted in moments of discord between the 1940s script and creative choices. Impromptu discos to Madonna’s ‘Material Girl’, replacing the Varsouviana Polka motif with Blondie’s ‘Heart of Glass’ added little to the production. The latter inclusion spoilt the interaction between Blanche and the Evening Star delivery boy. The scene morphed into a sequence of contemporary dance. Rather than being a key moment where we audience witnesses the manipulative elements in Blanche’s character, the tone became too playful. ‘Heart of Glass’ played at a slow speed is not haunting, as the Polka would have been, but ghoulish. This may not have been an issue had the script been adapted to remove reference to the Polka, but this change had not been made. Changing the paper lantern, a prop of metaphorical significance, to a disco ball, may have been a nod to the updated sound design, but reduced the effectiveness of a central image.

Another moment that seemed slightly clumsy was the role of the flower seller, the ‘Mexican Woman’ of Williams’ text. Here, the character leapt into the Kowalski’s apartment, throwing flowers as confetti, wearing in Día de los Muertos make-up and shouted flores para los muertos [flowers for the dead]’. The cosmetics worked well, but the entrance into the apartment seemed to a too obvious symbol of Blanche’s upcoming breakdown.

These elements aside, centring upon what strikes us in 2018 as a damaging conception of masculinity offered a fresh way of interpreting Stanley and Mitch. When Mitch (a stand-out performance from Dexter Flanders) worries for his mother, and is embarrassed at the mess made by the poker party, he emerges with more integrity than the strutting peacock that is Kowalski. Again, the set design excels here. Mitch’s choice to sit with Blanche over Stanley, Steve and Pablo became a tableau depicting a character toying with a new conception of himself. He was rejecting his friends’ violence and demands for emotional distance.

The Stanley Kowalski of popular legend is a smouldering Marlon Brando. Knowles’ Kowalski was not smouldering. He was petty and spoilt. In fact, it seemed implausible that Stella would trust him over Blanche, which made the concluding scene difficult to accept. We consistently saw Blanche’s Stanley, rather than Stella’s. It may be questioned whether this was what a 1940s audience would have seen. However, these questions are irrelevant, since the work exists in 2018, and can be acted and interpreted accordingly, by individuals who more attuned to details in Williams’ script which critique of toxic codes of behaviour.

Ultimately, this production was daring. However, it needed to decide whether it was completely placing Williams’ characters in 2018. The props suggested this to be the case, yet elements in the script became anachronistic as a result. This should not however distract from the production’s success in presenting a Stanley Kowalski that challenged previous, romanticised portrayals.

Does ‘Wellington’s Victory’ deserve Beethoven’s name?

0

Beethoven’s fifteen-minute orchestral work ‘Wellington’s Victory’ (Op. 91, 1813) by the late Sir Neville Marriner and the Academy of St Martin in the Fields begins with a minute of chirping, by what sounds like both birds and crickets. Then enter the hoof beats of galloping horses, then drums and trumpets sound the rhythms of a marching army. Rising from this background, the music finally comes into its own with renditions of ‘Rule, Britannia!’ and, after some clinking of mess cans, ‘For he’s a jolly good fellow’ (or rather, the French folk song of the same melody, ‘Marlborough is leaving for the war’). These tunes represent the British and  French sides respectively at the 1813 Battle of Victoria, which the piece celebrates.

Throughout the remainder of the first half of the piece, ‘Battle’, they’re played to symbolise the events of the battle, while ‘God save the king’ is the subject of the fugue celebrating the British victory in the second half of the piece, the ‘Victory Symphony’. All good fun. But also, at least for me, rather embarrassing. The bird song and hooves are additions by Marriner, but Beethoven’s score already has generous helpings of cannonry and rifle fire. When I hear a ‘Marlborough’ played to represent a French retreat, accompanied by yet another bout of gunfire, I  cringe. Does this really live up to Beethoven’s venerable name?

My reaction is far from unique. Critical evaluation is almost uniformly negative. Musicologists, such as Richard Taruskin, describe it as a ‘piece of orchestral claptrap’. Yet in Beethoven’s time, it was one of his most popular works. It also shares much with the most admired and canonical of his works, such as the Third (‘Eroica’) Symphony. As in the first movement of the Eroica, whose structure is the subject of much musicological discussion, in Wellington’s Victory an amorphous, potential-laden beginning ramifies, reaches a crisis
(the forte fortissimo chromatic descent in the ‘Storm March’ section of ‘Battle’) and is followed by a triumphant return in the ‘Victory Symphony’, where ‘God save the king’ is developed contrapuntally with characteristic sophistication.

It’s easier to identify the historical contingency of our expectations than to broaden those expectations. Probably like most people brought up on the more canonical works of Viennese classicism, I still feel an instinctive sense of embarrassment when listening to ‘Wellington’s Victory’. But if the piece isn’t great art, that’s our fault as much as its own.

Don’t know much about history

A wise man (Peter Capaldi on Peep Show) once said ‘there is no new history, only new historians’. By the same virtue there is no new music, only new musicians. From sifting through old records to finding samples for a new rap song, or reinventing a classical masterpiece, artists are continuously looking back, to move forward. These music magpies beg, borrow, and steal (or create/ recreate, as some would say) to find their sounds. History. Some want to erase it, some want to re-visit it, some want to re-invent it. All want to make it. Do they succeed? You be the judge.

Review: Brave New World

‘Community, identity, stability.’ This is the motto of the dystopian London conceived by Aldous Huxley in his 1931 novel Brave New World. It is with an emphasis on this dogma that the audience is introduced to Four Seven Two’s production of the novel, adapted for the stage by Miranda Mackay.

Six hundred years in the future, London is a city that has been transformed as part of the totalitarian ‘World State.’ In the quest for ‘civilisation,’ the State’s authorities monitor a strict regime in which its citizens are genetically engineered and kept ‘happy’ through a regular dosage of the euphoria-inducing drug, soma. For a world that sounds like nothing could go wrong, the resulting atmosphere is suffocating, with happiness proving unrelenting. Any diversity of feeling is considered unnatural.  

The plot focuses on two contrasting citizens: the popular Lenina Crowe (Amelia Holt), an ideal example of the regime; and Bernard Marx (Patrick Orme), an outsider who is defined by his dissatisfaction with the seemingly perfect world he inhabits. The two are brought together by a shared sense of curiosity and a visit to the ‘Savage Reserve,’ populated by the ‘uncivilized’ humans who remain tied to the human traditions of religion and history, brings the pair in contact with Shakespeare-reciting savage, John (Lucy Miles). John is unusual in that he was born to World State parents – his mother, Linda (Esme Sanders), having been lost in a storm during a trip to the savage reserve years earlier. John and Linda’s eventual return to the city of London allows for Huxley to juxtapose human consciousness across these parallel worlds, which forces the audience to question which is better: to live in a world of constant happiness where your identity is chosen for you; or the ability to experience a world of complexity where one must experience the plethora of human emotion, including immense pain and suffering? The critical choice put to us is between stability and feeling – as the Director (Marcus Knight-Adams) remarks of the savages in the introductory scene, ‘they felt strongly, and feeling strongly, how could they be stable?’

For this production at the Keble O’Reilly, the audience are thrown into the workings of the World State with a vigour that leaves no audience member falling to the wayside. This was aided by a very well executed technical design that proved near hypnotic. It is evident that director Georgie Botham, a self-confessed Berkoff enthusiast, has a definite clarity of vision for this production. The ensemble erupt onto the stage as the play begins, bringing with them a heightened physical and visual presence that is simply a joy to watch.

What makes Botham’s approach so appropriate when embodying the story of Huxley’s novel for stage is her ability to highlight the dichotomy of the individual and the collective – a dichotomy that feels as much a problem of the human existence now as it would have done to Huxley in 1931. This dichotomy is made immediate through a constant back and forth between tight choral work by the ensemble, and the heightened exploration of relationships between individuals. The overwhelming power of the collective is also emphasised by vocal layering, with the recurring motif of laughter communicating the constant anxieties of societal judgement characteristic of the World State.

A production with such an emphasis on stylised characterisation and choral movement demands discipline and commitment on the part of actors. This production did not disappoint – far from it. Performances across the board were met with considered detail and embodied with a level of control that I think is rarely found on the student stage. In particular, Marcus Knight-Adams was a delight to watch – so much so that a brief cameo he had as a seagull meant I was momentarily stolen away by intense laughter. Knight-Adams, as administrator of the Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre, i.e. the birthplace of ‘civilised’ humans in London, brought to the role such heightened physical consistency that meant that, toward the end of the play when he engages in a debate with the savage John, a momentary flicker of human vulnerability felt particularly poignant.

This scene between John and the Director was a highlight for me, as the two (who oddly happen to be father and son) clash over whose world is better for humanity. The scene ends with John insisting that he is ‘claiming the right to be unhappy.’ As John, Lucy Miles demanded audience attention at all times, and spoke with commendable diction appropriate for the eloquence of Miranda Mackay’s script.

Although this production was executed pretty phenomenally, the only thing I could say was that there were times where ensemble members could afford to go even further with characterisation and physicality. Certain members of the ensemble, particularly Esme Sanders, achieved such impressive contortions of the face and body that in an odd way she stuck out. Whilst of course I do take into account first night nerves, I would encourage all members of the ensemble to push it to that level, and I believe the result could be even more effective.

I would urge Oxford’s theatre-lovers to head to the Keble O’Reilly to see this frankly brilliant production.

No, Labour did not lose the local elections

It seems that the momentum Labour had around the general election has faded, basically stagnating in the polls, a point or two behind the Tories.

Indeed, we’ve seen essentially the same result as that of the 2017 general election, with both parties tied on 35% of the national vote. But let’s be clear about the facts.
Labour did not do badly in the 2018 local elections. They gained 78 councillors and saw a better result than Miliband did in 2014. Where Labour did go wrong is here they would hope to be doing better, and they set their expectations substantially higher than they should have.

Warren Morgan, leader of Brighton and Hove Council, said that while he did not wish “to dismiss successes in places like Adur and Worthing, and the increased vote share in London”, ultimately “Labour needs to be doing much better in towns across the North and Midlands if it is to secure a majority at the next election”.

He echoes the thoughts of many Labour activists, who see the Tories’ shambolic Brexit strategy and their handling of the Windrush scandal as a sign Labour should be up hundreds of seats. From these results, the BBC has predicted that Labour would be the largest party in Parliament, but only by a margin of 3 MPs. Other parties seem to be spinning this line too, with a local Oxford Lib Dem councillor Stephen Goddard saying “It was a disappointing night for Labour” because “against a shambolic government, the official opposition should be doing a lot better than this”. Labour are at the peak of their membership and activism, and they should be able to mobilise that movement to win larger than they did.

What is significant about this election is that despite the collapse of UKIP, which many assumed would immediately head over to the Tories, Labour made gains. The situation that Miliband was working with in 2014 was a mass exodus of working class Labour voters leaving the Labour Party and joining UKIP.

It seems that a substantial number of these voters have returned to Labour, or at least had their places filled by more metropolitan voters. The latter is most likely true, with most of the areas that Labour did worse in being marginal seats in Brexit voting areas. This is indicative of a general shift throughout the country, as Labour slowly becomes a more metropolitan party, with working class voters being evenly split between Labour and the Conservatives at the most recent election. Class no longer seems to decide how an individual will vote, in stark contrast to Labour’s history.

Alex Bruce, leader of the Oxford Union Conservative Association said the same: “The Conservatives had a solid but not exceptional night, and took control of Basildon, Peterborough and Barnet despite Labour predictions of a wipeout.” Expectations were clearly set too high. While Labour would like to be winning councils like Westminster, it’s not realistic with the current state of the polls.

People are obviously disappointed, but this is a lesson to Labour that if they want to be setting their expectations to winning big, they need to actually put the work in place to do so.

But we should remember that local elections are not simply a poll for the general election. Turnout is incredibly low, and Labour was already in control of plenty of councils around the country, so there was a local backlash against the incumbent councils, which is natural. Issues like bins, homelessness, and road were often the centre of debate, not Brexit or Windrush. Of course, national issues do matter, with Labour’s current anti-semitism scandal being attributed as the reason for their failure to win Barnet.

However, it seems discouraging for Labour that they weren’t even able to win the council where the Grenfell Tower stood, despite serious blame being thrown at the Conservative Party for the tragedy.

However, other Labour activists are taking a more hopeful attitude. Local Oxford councillor Linda Smith said: “We had a goodresult in Oxford, increasing Labour’s majority on the council by one, despite the sad defeat of our colleague Dee Sinclair in Quarry & Risinghurst. This fits the trend which has emerged for Labour nationally since the General Election, with Labour consolidating support in university towns and London”, but even she goes on to say that Labour “needs to develop messages and policies which will appeal to voters in the postindustrial towns of the Midlands and North of England if we are to hope to win the next general election.”

Labour shouldn’t be too disappointed about these results, since they definitely have time before the next election to make progress. But neither should they be complacent. If the election was held tomorrow, it seems very  likely that they wouldn’t get a majority, and may even see Tories get into power with a coalition from the Lib Dems. While the momentum has faded, it seems possible that Labour can resurrect for a successful win in the next election, but there clearly needs to be serious changes within the party to get to that place.